What is salvation?

[Kersh]

The oldest son was generally considered the heir of a king. But with God's children, all are heirs.

In that sense, I think the doctrine of adoption more closely matches the term as it is generally used today. Under the law (at least in the US) today, an adopted child has the same rights to inherit as does a biological child. A youngest child has the same rights as the eldest. My point is the inheritance is part of the doctrine of adoption, but it is not the totality of it.

 

[Kersh]

Adoption doesn't ignore that sin can still separate a believer from God. If a person does not repent of their grevious sins towards God like lying, lusting, and hating others (despite the conviction of the Spirit for them to repent), then they are actively rebelling against God.

For obviously if a father had a loyal son who one day turned and just murdered a whole bunch of people and was looking to kill even his own father and the entire family, surely they are no longer an adopted son.


...

The distinction between sin and actively rebelling is important. I would not disown or disinherit my children just because they made choices that I find morally unsound. Honestly, it would take a lot to convince me to disown a child of mine, but I suppose attempted patricide might do it. I trust that God loves more perfectly than I do, and so I don't know that He would ever disown one of his children. However, God knowing all, would He even adopt a child who is going to rebel to such an extreme? I honestly don't know.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

However, God knowing all, would He even adopt a child who is going to rebel to such an extreme? I honestly don't know.

He knows everybody, and gives everybody the best opportunities possible to be becoming faithful and true, "what amazing love the Father has for us, that He would give us the chance to be begotten of Him (children of Yhwh(God) ) " 1 John and elsewhere in Scripture.

But remember the tree that did not bear fruit for a year, 2 years, 3 years ? ---
the keeper offers to fertilize it , perhaps over and over again,
before the
owner tells him to cut it down and cast it into the fire.

So, just simply not bearing fruit (which almost always is incorrectly said to be emotions or feelings or somesuch - it's not) is enough for a tree to be thrown into the fire.

i.e. it doesn't look like "EXTREME" sin or rebellion to some people,
but to God it is unacceptable.

 

[sdowney717]

He knows everybody, and gives everybody the best opportunities possible to be becoming faithful and true, "what amazing love the Father has for us, that He would give us the chance to be begotten of Him (children of Yhwh(God) ) " 1 John and elsewhere in Scripture.

But remember the tree that did not bear fruit for a year, 2 years, 3 years ? ---
the keeper offers to fertilize it , perhaps over and over again,
before the
owner tells him to cut it down and cast it into the fire.

So, just simply not bearing fruit (which almost always is incorrectly said to be emotions or feelings or somesuch - it's not) is enough for a tree to be thrown into the fire.

i.e. it doesn't look like "EXTREME" sin or rebellion to some people,
but to God it is unacceptable.

That shows the kindness of God towards people whom He knows will never repent.
Since the tree is known by it's fruit and that tree is fruitless, it's destiny is still the fire.
God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance. God is kind and merciful even to ungrateful people.

Luke 6:35 New King James Version (NKJV)
35 But love your enemies, do good, and lend, hoping for nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High. For He is kind to the unthankful and evil.

The gardner is aiding the bad tree, to try and make it fruitful to God, by fertilizing it and caring for it. BUT this shows also the righteous judgement of God that there are none good, no one seeks for God, there are none who understand, they have all turned aside, become unfruitful, unprofitable, that is they are true to the old nature, not having been born of God. But God gives them a chance to see if anyone will understand and turn but none do.

Romans 3 describes the sinful state of unregenerate mankind.

9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all. For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin.

10 As it is written:

“There is none righteous, no, not one;
11 There is none who understands;
There is none who seeks after God.
12 They have all turned aside;
They have together become unprofitable;
There is none who does good, no, not one.”
13 “Their throat is an open tomb;
With their tongues they have practiced deceit”;
“The poison of asps is under their lips”;
14 “Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness.”
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 Destruction and misery are in their ways;
17 And the way of peace they have not known.”
18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”


In Romans 2, Paul teaches the same. Notice v5, Paul also teaches such people are storing up wrath for themselves spurning God's kindness refusing to repent. In truth, God commands all men everywhere to repent and believe in Christ, even in the natural with their old nature without regard to Him doing anything supernatural as in making us born again, all are commanded to repent and believe regardless. But they can not bear good fruit being the bad tree.

Romans 2 New King James Version (NKJV)
God’s Righteous Judgment
1 Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are who judge, for in whatever you judge another you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. 2 But we know that the judgment of God is according to truth against those who practice such things. 3 And do you think this, O man, you who judge those practicing such things, and doing the same, that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance?5 But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, 6 who “will render to each one according to his deeds”: 7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; 8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, 9 tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; 10 but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.11 For there is no partiality with God.

 

[Commander]

The Bible talks about salvation, justification, adoption, heirship, redemption, sanctification, glorification, among other terms.

What is the relationship between these concepts? Are they different ways of describing the same thing? Is salvation a general term that is summed up by two or more of the other terms? They are all integral parts of the what Jesus Christ has done for us.

I ask these questions because I feel like so much of the discussion of soteriology is about OSAS or eternal security vs. conditional security. But, I wonder if these terms have any meaning if we don't first identify what it means to be "saved".
See Titus 3:5-6.

For example, it seems that the adoption, heirship, and redemption are all treated as part and parcel of justification(See Romans 5:18). And, some would say that these are all aspects of salvation. But, what if a person who has been justified never becomes sanctified?
See Hebrews 10:10.

Or is the fact that that person never becomes sanctified proof that he or she never was justified?
See Titus 3:7.
Or are justification and sanctification two sides of the same coin?
See Romans 8:28-30.
I guess I wonder if the whole debate about eternal security really comes down to how well established our understanding of all of these topics is.

Just know that our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ meets all of these words. For He is the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe(1 Timothy 4:10). Have a blessed day, brother.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The distinction between sin and actively rebelling is important. I would not disown or disinherit my children just because they made choices that I find morally unsound.

The Bible says all sin is ultimately done towards God (Genesis 20:6) (Genesis 39:9) (Psalms 51:4 cf. 2 Samuel 12:7-9) (Matthew 25:40). So if they did these sinful things towards you as an act of rebellion then it would be different. Yes, we can forgive them, but there has to come a point where we know they will not change and they will just want to be evil and their heart is hard towards you. Imagine if your child kept stealing from you and or doing things to hurt you. You could not keep them around your house in a normal way amongst the rest of the family because they are so destructive by their sinful ways. You could not keep them around the other normal obedient members of the family. They could not take part in the normal good family. God's Kingdom is a place where there is no sin. It is not a place where people are not sinful because God removed their sinfulness from them (as if it was some kind of lobotomy type operation). God's Kingdom is not a sinful place because His people CHOOSE not to sin against God now.

Honestly, it would take a lot to convince me to disown a child of mine, but I suppose attempted patricide might do it.

God says that the wrath of God comes upon the CHILDREN of disobedience. They are still children, but they in disobedience to Him and cannot be in God's good favor (Colossians 3:6) (Ephesians 5:6). This is because they are committing various sins that God finds highly offensive (that cause a separation between man and God). In fact, it only took one sin in the Garden by Adam by his eating of a wrong tree to cause a separation between God and man.

I trust that God loves more perfectly than I do, and so I don't know that He would ever disown one of his children. However, God knowing all, would He even adopt a child who is going to rebel to such an extreme? I honestly don't know.

God has to disown one of his children who are of the Kingdom for horrible sins done against Him because:

(a) They are not proving they really love God and that they are loyal to Him.
They love their sin and their self more than God. This is why Jesus says if you love me, keep my Commandments (John 14:15). This is why Jesus says why do you call me Lord, Lord and do not the things that I say? (Luke 6:46). Can a person be in God's Kingdom and not love God? Can a person not make Jesus their Lord and be in God's Kingdom? Surely not.

(b) God is holy and He cannot agree with a believer's wrong thinking that they can do evil and still be saved.
For the Scriptures say we are to have the mind of Christ (God) (1 Corinthians 2:16).

(c) God cannot go against a certain standard of morality or otherwise God is not good. It would mean we could not trust God in doing good in every given situation. If God were to allow evil people into heaven who were not really remorseful over their evil, then why not just save everyone against their evil will? In fact, why doesn't God save all evil people? Because true love exists when both parties AGREE to love one another of their own free will choice. You cannot force a woman to love and marry you if she does not feel the same way. It is the same if a believer sins against God. They are proving they really do not love God because they are more loyal to their sin then they are to God.​

In fact, if you need a solid passage telling you that Christ will cast the children of the Kingdom into the fire to be destroyed because of their iniquity or sin, then you need to slowly and carefully re-read Matthew 13:41-42 many times in deep prayer with God. For it says,

41 "The Son of man [Jesus] shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom [anyone who is in or who professes to be a part of his kingdom] all things that offend, and them which do iniquity [sin];
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire [Lake of Fire]: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." (Matthew 13:41-42).​

Did you catch what it said? It says Jesus will send forth his angels so as to gather out of HIS KINGDOM all who do iniquity (sin) and these angels will cast them into the furnace of fire (Which is the Lake of Fire). Now, if you were to truly read and understand this passage (And do not have a desire to change what it says): I really do not see how you can think those in HIS KINGDOM will be able to get away with doing iniqiutiy or sin done against HIm.


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Just know that our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ meets all of these words. For He is the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe(1 Timothy 4:10). Have a blessed day, brother.

I believe this verse is talking about babies and or the mentally handicapped who are unable to believe. But nowhere can we assume that this is talking about unbelievers (in the sense that God is going to save everyone - i.e. Universal Salvationism) because the Bible does not teach such a concept. People have to believe in Jesus as their Savior and actually be faithful to Him in order to be saved. For it is what the Bible plainly teaches.


...

 

[bcbsr]

Yes, salvation is a life-long process for believers. However, you can't pick and choose which aspects you desire. You must include them all...namely -

John 5
28 Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice
29 and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.

Luke 10
27 So he answered and said, “ ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,’ and ‘your neighbor as yourself.’”
28 And He said to him, “You have answered rightly; do this and you will live.”

These words are as plain as the nose on one's face. However, some will not believe these words of Jesus, because it upsets their theology. I often wonder how a 'believer' can just skip over these words of life, and not blink an eye. But, this does show each person has free-will to believe however they wish.



The non-OSAS people don't need systematic theology to understand and believe the words of Jesus. Systematic theology has positioned the OSAS to either not believe the words of life of Jesus, or just ignore them.

There are no hurdles to jump, no special revelation needed, or no doctorate in theology needed to understand these words of life from the Savior Himself. What's sad is that some will go on with their beliefs and not even give the words of Jesus the light of day.

Clearly you're another of the Neo-Circumcision. In contrast to your salvation by works gospel, Paul writes,"as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them." But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for "the just shall live by faith. Yet the law is not of faith, but "the man who does them shall live by them." Gal 3:10-12

In Luke 10 Jesus challenged the man who thought he was good, with the Law. Those who can't accept the gospel, Jesus challenges them with the Law.

So, have you continue in all things which are written in the book of the law? Else you're disqualified to be justified by law.

Furthermore those born of God do not continue to sin. The reason why is because of their new nature. "No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God." 1John 3:9 As an unbeliever you can't conceive of this, having never experienced it yourself. And so you slander those who believe the gospel.

 

[bcbsr]

Let's say a genuine born again believer lies every day. Is he eternally secure?

For instance, this genuine born again believer does not keep His commandments. John calls him a liar and the truth is not in him. Is his salvation secure in his lying? Or, can he keep lying and still be secure?

Strawman argument - it simply doesn't happen. (1John 3:9)

 

[Marvin Knox]

Clearly you're another of the Neo-Circumcision. In contrast to your salvation by works gospel, Paul writes,"as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them." But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for "the just shall live by faith. Yet the law is not of faith, but "the man who does them shall live by them." Gal 3:10-12

In Luke 10 Jesus challenged the man who thought he was good, with the Law. Those who can't accept the gospel, Jesus challenges them with the Law.

So, have you continue in all things which are written in the book of the law? Else you're disqualified to be justified by law.

Furthermore those born of God do not continue to sin. The reason why is because of their new nature. "No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God." 1John 3:9 As an unbeliever you can't conceive of this, having never experienced it yourself. And so you slander those who believe the gospel.

I have been truly amazed at the number of people here are of the same persuasion as him.

There are a few who simply believe that it is "possible" to forfeit your salvation but very rare. I disagree. But I do understand the doubt.

But many more seem here to me to have crossed over that hard to detect line where one doubts his "eternal" security and passed in the real of preaching a gospel of works.

Strawman argument - it simply doesn't happen.

While I will admit that there have been believers who have entered into sin for a period of time - the scripture couldn't be more clear that a true believer would not continue in that sin until the end.

I'm certainly not proud to say that I am one who falls into that category myself.

I've been saved for something like 58 years now and have struggled with sin in it's various forms for most of those years - particularly in my youth.

But - thank God that He is faithful to His promises.

 

[EmSw]

I have been truly amazed at the number of people here are of the same persuasion as him.

There are a few who simply believe that it is "possible" to forfeit your salvation but very rare. I disagree. But I do understand the doubt.

But many more seem here to me to have crossed over that hard to detect line where one doubts his "eternal" security and passed in the real of preaching a gospel of works.

I am amazed at those who say they take the whole counsel of God for their beliefs. However, when the whole counsel of God is presented, they actually turn the other way. We have these words from the Savior Himself to His church -

Revelation 3
14 “And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write, ‘These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God:
15 “I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot.
16 So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth.

Jesus didn't say, I know your election, I know your faith, I know your predestination, or I know your eternal security. HE SAID I KNOW YOUR WORKS! What Jesus said was about the church's works! Listen closely, Jesus wished they were cold or hot. Cold meaning evil works, hot meaning good works.

However, these believers were lukewarm, that is, they had evil works mixed in with their good works. While some condone living in sin, Jesus said He will vomit, spit, and spew you out of His mouth. Yes, no one can snatch you out of His hand, but Jesus will vomit you out if you live in evil works.

And again, we have those who say you have liberty to live as you wish without relationship to salvation, but Jesus says otherwise, and guess who has the truth and will get the last word?

Yes, I am amazed.

 

[bling]

Clearly you're another of the Neo-Circumcision. In contrast to your salvation by works gospel, Paul writes,"as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them." But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for "the just shall live by faith. Yet the law is not of faith, but "the man who does them shall live by them." Gal 3:10-12

In Luke 10 Jesus challenged the man who thought he was good, with the Law. Those who can't accept the gospel, Jesus challenges them with the Law.

So, have you continue in all things which are written in the book of the law? Else you're disqualified to be justified by law.

Furthermore those born of God do not continue to sin. The reason why is because of their new nature. "No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God." 1John 3:9 As an unbeliever you can't conceive of this, having never experienced it yourself. And so you slander those who believe the gospel.

Gal. 6: 8 Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. 9 Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. 10 Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.

Paul explains plainly that eternal life is the harvest in the future we do not want to “give up”, but that also teaches we can give it up.

Our doing good stuff while here on earth (or better: our allowing God to work through us doing good stuff) is not to “earn”, “payback” or to allow us to “hold on to our salvation”. We want to continue to utilize Godly type Love and not get caught up in carnal type love so the huge Love Feast of Heaven (unselfish type Love only) still has value to us and not something we would sell on the cheap.

 

[Kersh]

The Bible says all sin is ultimately done towards God (Genesis 20:6) (Genesis 39:9) (Psalms 51:4 cf. 2 Samuel 12:7-9) (Matthew 25:40). So if they did these sinful things towards you as an act of rebellion then it would be different. Yes, we can forgive them, but there has to come a point where we know they will not change and they will just want to be evil and their heart is hard towards you. Imagine if your child kept stealing from you and or doing things to hurt you. You could not keep them around your house in a normal way amongst the rest of the family because they are so destructive by their sinful ways. You could not keep them around the other normal obedient members of the family. They could not take part in the normal good family. God's Kingdom is a place where there is no sin. It is not a place where people are not sinful because God removed their sinfulness from them (as if it was some kind of lobotomy type operation). God's Kingdom is not a sinful place because His people CHOOSE not to sin against God now.



God says that the wrath of God comes upon the CHILDREN of disobedience. They are still children, but they in disobedience to Him and cannot be in God's good favor (Colossians 3:6) (Ephesians 5:6). This is because they are committing various sins that God finds highly offensive (that cause a separation between man and God). In fact, it only took one sin in the Garden by Adam by his eating of a wrong tree to cause a separation between God and man.



God has to disown one of his children who are of the Kingdom for horrible sins done against Him because:

(a) They are not proving they really love God and that they are loyal to Him.
They love their sin and their self more than God. This is why Jesus says if you love me, keep my Commandments (John 14:15). This is why Jesus says why do you call me Lord, Lord and do not the things that I say? (Luke 6:46). Can a person be in God's Kingdom and not love God? Can a person not make Jesus their Lord and be in God's Kingdom? Surely not.

(b) God is holy and He cannot agree with a believer's wrong thinking that they can do evil and still be saved.
For the Scriptures say we are to have the mind of Christ (God) (1 Corinthians 2:16).

(c) God cannot go against a certain standard of morality or otherwise God is not good. It would mean we could not trust God in doing good in every given situation. If God were to allow evil people into heaven who were not really remorseful over their evil, then why not just save everyone against their evil will? In fact, why doesn't God save all evil people? Because true love exists when both parties AGREE to love one another of their own free will choice. You cannot force a woman to love and marry you if she does not feel the same way. It is the same if a believer sins against God. They are proving they really do not love God because they are more loyal to their sin then they are to God.​

In fact, if you need a solid passage telling you that Christ will cast the children of the Kingdom into the fire to be destroyed because of their iniquity or sin, then you need to slowly and carefully re-read Matthew 13:41-42 many times in deep prayer with God. For it says,

41 "The Son of man [Jesus] shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom [anyone who is in or who professes to be a part of his kingdom] all things that offend, and them which do iniquity [sin];
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire [Lake of Fire]: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." (Matthew 13:41-42).​

Did you catch what it said? It says Jesus will send forth his angels so as to gather out of HIS KINGDOM all who do iniquity (sin) and these angels will cast them into the furnace of fire (Which is the Lake of Fire). Now, if you were to truly read and understand this passage (And do not have a desire to change what it says): I really do not see how you can think those in HIS KINGDOM will be able to get away with doing iniqiutiy or sin done against HIm.


...

When I have a few minutes, I'd like to prepare a thought out repsonse to this. On the surface, though, I caution that we cannot treat iniquity and sin as synonyms. Transgression, iniquity, and sin are three separate but similar concepts.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

When I have a few minutes, I'd like to prepare a thought out repsonse to this. On the surface, though, I caution that we cannot treat iniquity and sin as synonyms. Transgression, iniquity, and sin are three separate but similar concepts.

These three words are merely varying degrees of disobedience (Which are still all in reference to sin). In either case, the passage proves that eternal security is not true because believers who commit iniquity are thrown in the lake of fire. Besides, it only takes one sin to be cast into hell fire. Jesus said if one looks upon a woman in lust, their whole body could be cast into hell fire (Matthew 5:28-30).


...

 

[Kersh]

These three words are merely varying degrees of disobedience (Which are still all in reference to sin). In either case, the passage proves that eternal security is not true because believers who commit iniquity are thrown in the lake of fire. Besides, it only takes one sin to be cast into hell fire. Jesus said if one looks upon a woman in lust, their whole body could be cast into hell fire (Matthew 5:28-30).


...

Actually, in context, it seems to say the opposite. Jesus is explaining the parable of the weeds. "The weeds," he says, "are the children of the evil one." (Matthew 13:38) These are the ones who will be gathered and destroyed. These are not children of God who merely sinned or rebelled. These are children of Satan, and nothing in the passage suggests that they were ever anything but.

Your interpretation of Matthew 5:30 is a bit off, too. It doesn't say that looking at a woman with lust will send a person to hell. It is hyperbole that calls us to holiness. A holy person is one who would give their right arm or right eye, rather than stray from God. You have to be careful about taking individual quotes from the Sermon on the Mount without looking at the whole sermon in context.

Really, neither of these passages serve as valid proof texts to either side of the debate.

And, I disagree about the meanings of sin, iniquity, and transgression. The first implies falling short of holiness. Nearly all believers will sin from time to time, until we achieve perfection. There is legitimate debate about whether Christian perfection can be achieved during our earthly lives. I tend towards the Wesleyan view on that. Iniquity generally refers to the collective evil of a group, such as when the Israelites were worshipping Baal. Transgression refers to deliberate disobedience to the law.

In the passage you cite, the Greek word is anomian (I don't know how to input Greek letters here), which is more accurately translated lawlessness or transgression. It is not merely sin (falling short of holiness), but is a deliberate and willful rebellion.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Actually, in context, it seems to say the opposite. Jesus is explaining the parable of the weeds. "The weeds," he says, "are the children of the evil one." (Matthew 13:38) These are the ones who will be gathered and destroyed. These are not children of God who merely sinned or rebelled. These are children of Satan, and nothing in the passage suggests that they were ever anything but.

Yet, the Scriptures say anyone who sins is a child of Satan and the child of God is the believer who does righteousness. For in 1 John 2:29, it says, "you know that everyone that does righteousness is born of him." In 1 John 3:7, we are told not to be deceived that doing righteousness makes us righteous. In John 3:8, we are then told that if we commit sin, we are of the devil. In 1 John 3:10 we are told that he that does not righteousness (Which is defined for us in verse 7) and he who does not love his brother is not born of God.

7 "Little children, let no man deceive you: he that does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
8 He that commits sin is of the devil; for the devil sins from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.
9 Whosoever is born of God does not commit sin; for his nature remains in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever does not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loves not his brother."(1 John 3:7-10).​

Again, this passage says he that does not righteousness or does not love his brother is not born of God. If one is not born of God or born again, they cannot even enter the Kingdom of God. Jesus said so himself in John chapter 3.

Also, in John 3:15 we are told that anyone who hates his brother is a murderer and that no murderer has eternal life abiding in them.

Your interpretation of Matthew 5:30 is a bit off, too. It doesn't say that looking at a woman with lust will send a person to hell. It is hyperbole that calls us to holiness. A holy person is one who would give their right arm or right eye, rather than stray from God. You have to be careful about taking individual quotes from the Sermon on the Mount without looking at the whole sermon in context.

So you just allegorize the part of the Scriptures that you do not like to hear? No verse (or set of verses) within the sermon on the mount indicates that this is allegorical. So do you believe hell is allegorical? Please provide the verses that makes you think this way.

Besides, this is not the only passage that refutes Eternal Security. Matthew 6:15 says if we do not forgive we will not be forgiven by the Father. A person who is not forgiven by the Father is not going to be able to enter God's Kingdom. Revelation 21:8 says all liars will have their part in the Lake of Fire. All means all; And John makes no mention that there is another group of liars who are an exception to this rule.

And, I disagree about the meanings of sin, iniquity, and transgression.
The first implies falling short of holiness. Nearly all believers will sin from time to time, until we achieve perfection.

No. Not even close.

When the Israelites worshiped the golden calf at Mount Sinai, Moses told them that they committed a “great” sin (Exodus 32:30-31). A “great sin” is more serious than just “sin.”

Also, the New Testament speaks about varying degrees of sin, as well. For Paul essentially tells us that is possible for evil people can go from bad to worse (2 Timothy 3:13).

In fact, Jesus Himself said,

"He who delivers me unto you has the greater sin"
(John 19:11).​

There is legitimate debate about whether Christian perfection can be achieved during our earthly lives. I tend towards the Wesleyan view on that.

I do not know about the Wesleyan view, but the Bible teaches that one can reach a state of Sinless Perfectionism.

Revelation 14:3-5 says that the 144,000 were found without fault before the throne of God.
1 Peter 4:1 says he that has suffered in the flesh has ceased (stopped) from sin.
Galatians 5:24 says they that are Christ's have crucified the affections and lusts. Have you crucified the affections and lusts?
David said he hid His Word (i.e. God's Word) in his heart so that he may not sin against the Lord (Psalms 119:11).
Jesus told two people to, "sin no more." (John 5:14) (John 8:11). In fact, the man Jesus healed said that if he were to sin again, a worse thing would come upon him (John 5:14). This means, that Jesus believed it was possible for this man to stop sinning. Otherwise Jesus would have been lying to the man (if Jesus knew that this man could not stop sinning).

In the passage you cite, the Greek word is anomian (I don't know how to input Greek letters here), which is more accurately translated lawlessness or transgression. It is not merely sin (falling short of holiness), but is a deliberate and willful rebellion.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

First, you are not an expert in Biblical Greek. Nobody is. Nobody grew up speaking and writing Biblical Greek within the times of Paul. The only way for you to know what it is saying in the Greek is if you were to compare it with English translations or to use something like Blue Letter Bible. Second, the Bible lists various sins that will cause one not to inherit the Kingdom of God, or to have the Wrath of God to come upon them, or to have them be cast into the lake of fire, which is the second death (Galatians 5:19-21, Ephesians 5:3-5, Colossians 3:5-6, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Revelation 21:8).


...

 

[Kersh]

Yet, the Scriptures say anyone who sins is a child of Satan and the child of God is the believer who does righteousness. For in 1 John 2:29, it says, "you know that everyone that does righteousness is born of him." In 1 John 3:7, we are told not to be deceived that doing righteousness makes us righteous. In John 3:8, we are then told that if we commit sin, we are of the devil. In 1 John 3:10 we are told that he that does not righteousness (Which is defined for us in verse 7) and he who does not love his brother is not born of God.

7 "Little children, let no man deceive you: he that does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
8 He that commits sin is of the devil; for the devil sins from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.
9 Whosoever is born of God does not commit sin; for his nature remains in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever does not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loves not his brother."(1 John 3:7-10).​

Again, this passage says he that does not righteousness or does not love his brother is not born of God. If one is not born of God or born again, they cannot even enter the Kingdom of God. Jesus said so himself in John chapter 3.

Also, in John 3:15 we are told that anyone who hates his brother is a murderer and that no murderer has eternal life abiding in them.



So you just allegorize the part of the Scriptures that you do not like to hear? No verse (or set of verses) within the sermon on the mount indicates that this is allegorical. So do you believe hell is allegorical? Please provide the verses that makes you think this way.

Besides, this is not the only passage that refutes Eternal Security. Matthew 6:15 says if we do not forgive we will not be forgiven by the Father. A person who is not forgiven by the Father is not going to be able to enter God's Kingdom. Revelation 21:8 says all liars will have their part in the Lake of Fire. All means all; And John makes no mention that there is another group of liars who are an exception to this rule.



No. Not even close.

When the Israelites worshiped the golden calf at Mount Sinai, Moses told them that they committed a “great” sin (Exodus 32:30-31). A “great sin” is more serious than just “sin.”

Also, the New Testament speaks about varying degrees of sin, as well. For Paul essentially tells us that is possible for evil people can go from bad to worse (2 Timothy 3:13).

In fact, Jesus Himself said,

"He who delivers me unto you has the greater sin"
(John 19:11).​

I do not know about the Wesleyan view, but the Bible teaches that one can reach a state of Sinless Perfectionism.

Revelation 14:3-5 says that the 144,000 were found without fault before the throne of God.
1 Peter 4:1 says he that has suffered in the flesh has ceased (stopped) from sin.
Galatians 5:24 says they that are Christ's have crucified the affections and lusts. Have you crucified the affections and lusts?
David said he hid His Word (i.e. God's Word) in his heart so that he may not sin against the Lord (Psalms 119:11).
Jesus told two people to, "sin no more." (John 5:14) (John 8:11). In fact, the man Jesus healed said that if he were to sin again, a worse thing would come upon him (John 5:14). This means, that Jesus believed it was possible for this man to stop sinning. Otherwise Jesus would have been lying to the man (if Jesus knew that this man could not stop sinning).



First, you are not an expert in Biblical Greek. Nobody is. Nobody grew up speaking and writing Biblical Greek within the times of Paul. The only way for you to know what it is saying in the Greek is if you were to compare it with English translations or to use something like Blue Letter Bible. Second, the Bible lists various sins that will cause one not to inherit the Kingdom of God, or to have the Wrath of God to come upon them, or to have them be cast into the lake of fire, which is the second death (Galatians 5:19-21, Ephesians 5:3-5, Colossians 3:5-6, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Revelation 21:8).


...

I suppose if no one is an expert in Biblical Greek, then we have no way of knowing what the New Testament says. When we read translations, we're relying on someone else's expertise. If we try to read the Greek on our I own, we're relying on our own expertise. That creates quite a dilemma, doesn't it? How, then do we know God's word?


Based on your statements in this thread, I have to ask, do you sin?


Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I suppose if no one is an expert in Biblical Greek, then we have no way of knowing what the New Testament says. When we read translations, we're relying on someone else's expertise. If we try to read the Greek on our I own, we're relying on our own expertise. That creates quite a dilemma, doesn't it? How, then do we know God's word?

No. You know English because you were raised in reading, writing, and speaking it. You and everyone else on this planet does not know Biblical Greek without some scholarly guy guessing as to what it says. For you did not repent hearing the Greek. For it would be silly to assume Paul would not be correcting everyone on their Greek today. Why? Because it is a dead language. For even Greek scholars disagree with each other. In Acts 2, God was able to translate the languages perfectly so that everyone could understand each other. So it appears God is simple and can talk to us in our own language just fine. Nowhere in Scripture is it taught that we must learn another language to understand God.

Based on your statements in this thread, I have to ask, do you sin?

More than likely you are unaware that there are sins that lead unto spiritual death and sins that do not lead unto spiritual death (1 John 5:16-18).

I do not commit sins that lead unto death on a daily basis. I have faultered on occasion in the past. But I do not plan on doing so again. I also believe that with God's power, He will work in me the capacity to never fall ever again. Why? For the 144,000 were found without fault before the throne of God (Revelation 14:3-5). He that has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin (1 Peter 4:1). For they that are Christ's have crucified the affections and lusts (Galatians 5:24).

Sins unto death are the type of sins that will cause one to face the second death, which is the lake of fire. This would be sins like lying, hating, murdering, adultery, theft, and drunkenness, etc. (Revelation 21:8) (Galatians 5:19-21) (1 Corinthians 6:9-10) (Ephesians 5:3-5).

Sins not unto death are sins like not being baptized (1 Peter 3:21) and or hidden or secret faults (Psalms 19:12).


...

 

[Geralt]

this is easy to understand if you believe that salvation and its sub categories are all the work of God.
and OSAS is not really a debatable issue if one is to admit that God is sovereign and that we are all his workmanship.

The Bible talks about salvation, justification, adoption, heirship, redemption, sanctification, glorification, among other terms.

What is the relationship between these concepts? Are they different ways of describing the same thing? Is salvation a general term that is summed up by two or more of the other terms?

I ask these questions because I feel like so much of the discussion of soteriology is about OSAS or eternal security vs. conditional security. But, I wonder if these terms have any meaning if we don't first identify what it means to be "saved". For example, it seems that the adoption, heirship, and redemption are all treated as part and parcel of justification. And, some would say that these are all aspects of salvation. But, what if a person who has been justified never becomes sanctified? Or is the fact that that person never becomes sanctified proof that he or she never was justified? Or are justification and sanctification two sides of the same coin? I guess I wonder if the whole debate about eternal security really comes down to how well established our understanding of all of these topics is.

 

[Kersh]

No. You know English because you were raised in reading, writing, and speaking it. You and everyone else on this planet does not know Biblical Greek without some scholarly guy guessing as to what it says. For you did not repent hearing the Greek. For it would be silly to assume Paul would not be correcting everyone on their Greek today. Why? Because it is a dead language. For even Greek scholars disagree with each other. In Acts 2, God was able to translate the languages perfectly so that everyone could understand each other. So it appears God is simple and can talk to us in our own language just fine. Nowhere in Scripture is it taught that we must learn another language to understand God.

I repented and believed because I read His word, which was translated by people who learned the source languages. I am grateful for those men and women who developed this skill, so that I could know God's word. But, I believe that there is value in studying the source languages on my own, so I can understand nuances that are not as apparent in translation.

More than likely you are unaware that there are sins that lead unto spiritual death and sins that do not lead unto spiritual death (1 John 5:16-18).

I do not commit sins that lead unto death on a daily basis. I have faultered on occasion in the past. But I do not plan on doing so again. I also believe that with God's power, He will work in me the capacity to never fall ever again. Why? For the 144,000 were found without fault before the throne of God (Revelation 14:3-5). He that has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin (1 Peter 4:1). For they that are Christ's have crucified the affections and lusts (Galatians 5:24).

Sins unto death are the type of sins that will cause one to face the second death, which is the lake of fire. This would be sins like lying, hating, murdering, adultery, theft, and drunkenness, etc. (Revelation 21:8) (Galatians 5:19-21) (1 Corinthians 6:9-10) (Ephesians 5:3-5).

Sins not unto death are sins like not being baptized (1 Peter 3:21) and or hidden or secret faults (Psalms 19:12).


...

So, the short answer is yes, like the rest of us, you do sin. Given that fact, I'd say your theology puts you in a precarious spot. The Pharisees demanded moral perfection, and Jesus said that their righteousness was insufficient. If you had denied sinning, then you'd be calling God a liar. So, one thing thatis beyond reasoned debate among Christians is the fact that our salvation comes only from God's grace.

Paul says that God's grace saves us through faith. And, faith without works is dead. In other words, faith (pisteos is a great subject for a word study for those wanting to better understand God's grace) that does not is not expressed in the way we live is not really faith at all and is impotent to save. But faith without works is not more impotent than works without faith (such as is seen in legalism or doing good to impress God).

In short, we are called to be made holy, not by our own efforts, but by God's (sanctification). Different people are at different points of our salvation, but that doesn't make one person more "saved" than another.

I don't take a position in the OSAS debate. I don't know that any of us is truly "saved", but those who have faith in Jesus are surely being saved. Doea God ever abandon the saving process? I don't think he does. But, I do entertain the possibility that we can, by our own rebellion, frustrate God's work. I know that those who subscribe to OSAS would disagree. But, otoh, we also need to acknowledge that, if are able, by our own efforts to frustrate God's salavtion, it is not mere sin that does so, but our total unwillingness to be made holy.